Hammer wrote:Low and slow is where all the fun is, but speed has value too, no question about it. The good places to land don’t have lights, so twenty minutes flight time can be the difference between camping next to a good trout stream or having to divert to some asphalt armpit for the night.

And while I love flying as much as the next guy, it’s pretty pollyanna to believe that every flight is a little bit magical. Some of them just sort of really suck...

Like crossing the Great Basin IFR in heavy smoke while flying into the sun with knock-your-headset-off turbulence and a cabin temp of 91 degrees. IFR in turbulence is one thing, and breathing heavy smoke for hours on end is one thing, and being hot and dehydrated and having to piss is one thing, but you put them all together and that particular 3.8 hours was about as magical as a 1950’s root canal.

A bit faster cruise speed wouldn’t have broken my heart that day. Like maybe 290 knots or so…By the time that flight was over I’d have put two big rattlers and a hot badger down my pants before I’d have gotten back in my airplane.

Luckily the good flights far outnumber the bad ones, but there are times when increased fuel burn is a really, really small price to pay for getting there quicker.

Good one Hammer!

Hammer wrote:Low and slow is where all the fun is, but speed has value too, no question about it.

And while I love flying as much as the next guy, it’s pretty pollyanna to believe that every flight is a little bit magical. Some of them just sort of really suck...

<snipped for space>.

Luckily the good flights far outnumber the bad ones, but there are times when increased fuel burn is a really, really small price to pay for getting there quicker.

Another Realist in the crowd. Well stated Hammer.

Hammer wrote:Low and slow is where all the fun is, but speed has value too, no question about it. The good places to land don’t have lights, so twenty minutes flight time can be the difference between camping next to a good trout stream or having to divert to some asphalt armpit for the night.

And while I love flying as much as the next guy, it’s pretty pollyanna to believe that every flight is a little bit magical. Some of them just sort of really suck...

Like crossing the Great Basin IFR in heavy smoke while flying into the sun with knock-your-headset-off turbulence and a cabin temp of 91 degrees. IFR in turbulence is one thing, and breathing heavy smoke for hours on end is one thing, and being hot and dehydrated and having to piss is one thing, but you put them all together and that particular 3.8 hours was about as magical as a 1950’s root canal.

A bit faster cruise speed wouldn’t have broken my heart that day. Like maybe 290 knots or so…By the time that flight was over I’d have put two big rattlers and a hot badger down my pants before I’d have gotten back in my airplane.

Luckily the good flights far outnumber the bad ones, but there are times when increased fuel burn is a really, really small price to pay for getting there quicker.

But you could have landed any time, it was the Great Basin after all - one giant LZ!

If cars below me are passing me in cruise flight....I am going too slow. Can't stand that.

Like crossing the Great Basin IFR in heavy smoke while flying into the sun with knock-your-headset-off turbulence and a cabin temp of 91 degrees. IFR in turbulence is one thing, and breathing heavy smoke for hours on end is one thing, and being hot and dehydrated and having to piss is one thing, but you put them all together and that particular 3.8 hours was about as magical as a 1950’s root canal.

80kts minimum

Hammer wrote: Low and slow is where all the fun is....

That's just what the guys say who can't afford a faster airplane.
Kinda like the ugly gals claim that "true beauty comes from inside".

I do enough flying up high and fast for work that I really enjoy cruising around low and slow at 70mph @4gph in the cub, or 130mph @12gph in the 180. I will say however 70 in the cub can get a little tiring when you're trying to go a ways.

I'm pretty happy with my airplane's 130 mph/115 knot TAS most of the time, because if I had a whole lot more speed, I still wouldn't get to any destination within 250 miles much quicker, and much of my flying is just local joy riding where speed isn't an issue. Of course, a good headwind across 100F Nebraska, and that begins to suck a bit--one return from OSH had a GPS speed of all of 72 knots between Omaha and Grand Island. And that's about the only time I really do wish I could fly faster is to and from OSH or some similar 750-1000 mile destination.

As for length of legs, 2 hours is great, 3 is doable, and much longer than that is uncomfortable. The ol' bladder just isn't what it used to be.

Cary

I've done two 4.5+ hour legs in one day. Had to use a Gatorade bottle. It was doable, but not very enjoyable.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

CamTom12 wrote:I've done two 4.5+ hour legs in one day. Had to use a Gatorade bottle. It was doable, but not very enjoyable.

Those are long leg's alright. I'm in Cary's camp at about 3 hours max but will go longer if I have to.

Just when I think I've mastered the Gatoraid bottle trick, I find I'm not as good as I once was .

blackrock wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:I've done two 4.5+ hour legs in one day. Had to use a Gatorade bottle. It was doable, but not very enjoyable.

Those are long leg's alright. I'm in Cary's camp at about 3 hours max but will go longer if I have to.

Just when I think I've mastered the Gatoraid bottle trick, I find I'm not as good as I once was .

I agree. 3 hrs is a nice length. I've done 4 3hrs legs in a 150. I'd much rather cut that into 2 3 hr legs with the 180 I have now.
I like to go fast when I want to get somewhere. But I like to putter around when I'm checking stuff out at home. A notch of flaps and 70mph is enjoyable in the 180. So is 145mph when I want to get there. So like 3 very thing else aviation, it depends on the mission of the day, and choosing an aircraft that works for 90%.

140Kts is nice!

170 KTS was nice. I sold my T210 this month. Beautiful airplane. If I was travelling long distances, I'd have kept it. I hit about two thirds of the states and provinces on this continent in the 9 years that I flew it. After I bought the 185 last year, I found that I flew the 185 for fun, and the 210 when I needed to go somewhere. You could say that the 210 became my work plane, and I don't like to be at work when I'm flying. That issue is now resolved! I may own something fast later in life, maybe a twin Commander, but I can also imagine a Waco in my future.

I love to fly, and intend to enjoy a variety of airplanes and types of flying, from low and slow to high and fast, with everything in between.

I'm with Cary on short legs. The Underwood pilot who checked me out on my first pipeline tried to teach me to use zip lock bags. No way was my dexterity and relationship with Murphy up for that. He was a good pilot and survived to old age, but two things were very evident. He really wanted to go five hours on long range tanks and he really wanted to get around in three days. Those expectations scared ol contact. I covered all 3500 miles 99% of the time, but my schedule was three to seven days. And I stopped every two hours or so. My situation now would make me a hell of a pipeline pilot. Use a catheter every four hours.

I expect Zane would agree with my wife on that one. "Too much information."

For me how slow I will tolerate absolutely depends on the mission… and unless the mission dictates slow speed there is never such a thing as too fast

A 'too slow' speed for river cruising or game scouting don't exist, provided I'm already at or near the river or game areas. In fact, sometimes a Robinson might seem better suited.

The 'too slow' speed for < 2 hour cross countries for me is anything quicker than an auto, because at that range I'm really not going that far, nor sitting that long. Getting there 10 minutes faster is never going to be a game changer.

The 'too slow speed' for > 3 hr cross countries is currently around 140ish, because that's what most of the planes I fly that far tend to comfortably cruise at. It's what I've come to expect.

For true 'across the country' get from point a to point b flights I'm finding 140ish is slow enough to try my patience, but when I reconcile the price difference between a brand new 175 mph AT602 and a '78 model 140 mile 510 Thrush that prove to do the exact same work, every year, it all seems to make sense Actually the two '78 Thrush' out work the 12-14 AT's that show up each and every year, but saying that too loud will certainly start another OT debate

It's amazing how quick we learn to expect things, and lose tolerance for things that no longer cut the muster. I suspect If I had a Cub on bushwheels that did 160 and still landed at 30 my 'tolerance' for old '95P would change greatly. Just a few weeks ago while picking up my daughter from Flagstaff I realized we were bucking a pretty decent headwind. 15 minutes into the flight I was spewing unpleasantries completely in my own world when my daughter piped up in her biggest voice : "Dad! quit being such a spoiled brat! We just left Flag 15 minutes ago and are now over Jerome! If tried that in my pickup, I wouldn't be here for another three hours (long and windy roads)"…
I sheepishly bowed my head, apologized, and turned up the XM to hide any further stammering

Take care, Rob

contactflying wrote:I'm with Cary on short legs. The Underwood pilot who checked me out on my first pipeline tried to teach me to use zip lock bags. No way was my dexterity and relationship with Murphy up for that. He was a good pilot and survived to old age, but two things were very evident. He really wanted to go five hours on long range tanks and he really wanted to get around in three days. Those expectations scared ol contact. I covered all 3500 miles 99% of the time, but my schedule was three to seven days. And I stopped every two hours or so. My situation now would make me a hell of a pipeline pilot. Use a catheter every four hours.

I expect Zane would agree with my wife on that one. "Too much information."

When I was a wee lad I caged a ride in a Bonanza from here to there. Maybe 4 hours or so. The owner had what was called a relief tube installed. Sort of a funnel affair attached to a piece of tubing routed to a small venturi on the belly of the AC. Seemed like a pretty good idea at the time. I suppose these are frowned on these days?

I do all my cruising at the flight levels with the professionals at Alaska Airlines at the helm. Or better yet on the Alaska State ferry at 15kts.

When I lived south, loved the 180mph Comanche for going somewhere. Saw 240kts over the ground one trip going east. Felt like a jet pilot! Old, light one that could get in and out nearly like a C182. What a machine.

hotrod180 wrote:

Hammer wrote: Low and slow is where all the fun is....

That's just what the guys say who can't afford a faster airplane.
Kinda like the ugly gals claim that "true beauty comes from inside".

We say they have a "sweet spirit" in these parts.

Mister701 wrote: The owner had what was called a relief tube installed. Sort of a funnel affair attached to a piece of tubing routed to a small venturi on the belly of the AC. Seemed like a pretty good idea at the time. I suppose these are frowned on these days?

I saw a video of these bush pilots in Africa using a Venturi tube to suck flies off base of the windshield. It was about 1" in diameter and 4 ft long. They'd fish one end out the window so the end was perpendicular to the relative wind, and it sucked this flies right out. I started thinking "I bet that's their piss tube."